What are you using?

digitalfailure

digitalfailure

Staff Bog Cleaner 2015
Messages
12,595
Name
Brian
Edit My Images
Yes
I was wondering what colour space is most common on your cameras.

My 20D offers sRGB and Adobe RGB, and I don't really see much difference between the 2 profiles, so how do you shoot yours and what reasons do you have for it :)
 
I use sRGB on the camera and CS2. Apparently Adobe RGB is used professionally and gives a better reproduction using CMYK printers. sRGB was designed to reproduce the colour gamut on your average monitor.

So - I presume that sRGB would be better if you are just going to view at home. This begs a question though. Do On-line and High St processors use CMYK printers and if so would we be better using AdobeRGB for prints.

regards
 
I use sRGB because when I didn't I got different colours in CS2 and the web.
 
You sound as confused by it all as I am :doh:

I'm currently on the sRGB for both camera and cs2, My printing is still much darker than the screen image and i'm jiggered if I can find a cause of it. :shock:
 
sRGB - TBH because it was the default when I started, and I now have little reason to change, maybe if I was using printers that require it or I was selling work (like thats going to happen), then I might use Adobe RGB.

Digitalfailure - I have that exact problem, things look good (to me atleast on screen) and then the prints look like the contrast is way down.
 
My monitor looks as if the calibration is OK
Cs2 and Cs both seem happy with the working bits and bobs, i'm happy with the colour of the image and the printer is happy with the icc profiles for the paper and ink (both genuine epson), the soft proof preview looks a tad flatter than the display image as expected due to the smaller gamut.........

But the brightness on the prints is much lower on the print, shadow detail becomes solid black!

On one sunny shot of a pond at portmerion it printed as if it was all in shadow :(

Getting on my pip now it is
 
I use RGB on my camera and CS2, mainly because it's a bigger colour gamut than sRGB. And generally gives more depth to your images.

If you have a look at the 5D review on http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canoneos5d/page13.asp
and go to the bit titled colour space, (on page 13 if the link dosn't work) Now put your mouse over the sRGB and Adobe RGB taps and you'll see what I mean.
 
The difference in colour is quite dramatic in that image, i hope it wasn't cranked up during the conversion to sRGB
 
sRGB ... RGB ... ? Something else I gotta learn about then ?

My dSLR is set at sRGB and I have not played further with this setting yet ! In fact after this thread I may never !?!
 
digitalfailure said:
My printing is still much darker than the screen image and i'm jiggered if I can find a cause of it. :shock:
Click to expand...

Tell me about it. I've spent more hours than sense trying to calibrate, adjust, tweak etc in order to achieve a print which is the same as the monitor. To me, the bottom line is that I don't think it will ever happen, and I'm not prepared to shell out on something like Spyder and find out it makes no difference. I have got to a stage where my set-up is as near as damn it and it is ok for the few prints I do at home. If I want a batch I take them to Jessops and I find their reproduction immaculate.

However, back to RGB. This thread has prompted me to try Adobe RGB on camera and CS2 and I shall do a few comparison prints.

regards

As an afterthought to the printing question I even considered whether choice of software made any difference. A few months back I did a test on one image using different software and was surpised by the results. In order of best print (most like my monitor) this is what I found -

1 Canon Easy PhotoPrint
2 Microsoft Word (inserting image)
3 Elements
4 CS2
5 Picassa

I was urpised to find Adobe down the list, but I have using Easy photoPrint since.
 
sRGB, mainly beacuase that's what they were as default

digitalfailure said:
You sound as confused by it all as I am :doh:

I'm currently on the sRGB for both camera and cs2, My printing is still much darker than the screen image and i'm jiggered if I can find a cause of it. :shock:
Click to expand...
Mines a bit darker using the r300, using printer and paper profiles. I wouldn't like to count how many prints at different settings I've taken to try to get something I'm still not totally happy with.
 
RGB after advice from official Adobe CS2 training DVDs plus link Gary posted on image standards used by agencies.
 
I might start a show us yours thread.....this time on printed images and their ability to look nothing like the screen image :D
 
Ok guys, getting your printer to print to what you see on your screen requires you to calibrate your monitor, and to have custom profile made for each type of paper you use. And to set up the colour setting properly in CS2 or what other version you use.

Now rather than explain all the inn's and outs of what you need to do, I'll just say get in touch with Fotospeed and ask for Ray. If you buy their paper they will give you free custom profiles for each type of paper you buy. And he can email you full instructions on what to do.

Don't get confused with the profile that say Ilford offer for download. Fotospeed profiles are custom which means there made for you ink and printer and their paper.

You will also have to calibrate your monitor with something like a spyder, and if that's out of your price range then use Adobe gamma which you should find in your control panel.

I do 95% of my own printing and had all the problems that you have mentioned, but not any more. And just in case your wondering no I don't work for them or get any free stuff. They will also be at focus if anyone is interested.

Hope this helps as I know how frustrating it can be.
 
ASH said:
Ok guys, getting your printer to print to what you see on your screen requires you to calibrate your monitor, and to have custom profile made for each type of paper you use. And to set up the colour setting properly in CS2 or what other version you use.

Now rather than explain all the inn's and outs of what you need to do, I'll just say get in touch with Fotospeed and ask for Ray. If you buy their paper they will give you free custom profiles for each type of paper you buy. And he can email you full instructions on what to do.

Don't get confused with the profile that say Ilford offer for download. Fotospeed profiles are custom which means there made for you ink and printer and their paper.

You will also have to calibrate your monitor with something like a spyder, and if that's out of your price range then use Adobe gamma which you should find in your control panel.

I do 95% of my own printing and had all the problems that you have mentioned, but not any more. And just in case your wondering no I don't work for them or get any free stuff. They will also be at focus if anyone is interested.

Hope this helps as I know how frustrating it can be.
Click to expand...


All well and good :)

My screen is calibrated with adobe gamma and it looks great, I see all the greyscale boxes on test charts etc and brightness is good.

I use Epson's ICC for their Premium glossy photo paper, I also use their ink and their paper in the epson 950

The proof image on screen looks good with the icc selected, yet all the prints come out much darker than the screen.

So far i must have wasted 20 or so sheets of this premium paper to get 5 good A4 prints :doh: not to mention the amount of ink the printer has drunk doing it :shock: @ £495 per litre for ink it's a little :hissyfit: that I can't get it to do what I want it to do.
 
Use Adobe RGB, I get all my stuff printed in a photo lab and have never had any problems........except when they have decided to make alterations to my pics (even though I have asked them not to).
 
CriPPle said:
Use Adobe RGB, I get all my stuff printed in a photo lab and have never had any problems........except when they have decided to make alterations to my pics (even though I have asked them not to).
Click to expand...


With regard to that comment, I've never sent images away for printing as of yet. Whats the deal with that then......where do you stand if they tweak the image levels etc?

Can you get them to reprint ?
 
I'm currently trying out 'ProphotoRGB'.

Its got a larger colour spectrum, so the chances of clipping is reduced.
 
Adobe RGB.
Why start with less colours? If you need to convert to a smaller gamut that's fine, but it don't work the other way round...
 
digitalfailure said:
With regard to that comment, I've never sent images away for printing as of yet. Whats the deal with that then......where do you stand if they tweak the image levels etc?

Can you get them to reprint ?
Click to expand...

As long as you tell them they are already edited and you want absolutly no changes made, if they do change something and you're not happy with it just ask them and they will reprint it.

It's easy to see when they have made changes as there is a code on the back of the pic which will say.....I will dig out some pics tomorrow and post an example of what you will see on the back.
 
digitalfailure said:
All well and good :)

My screen is calibrated with adobe gamma and it looks great, I see all the greyscale boxes on test charts etc and brightness is good.

I use Epson's ICC for their Premium glossy photo paper, I also use their ink and their paper in the epson 950

The proof image on screen looks good with the icc selected, yet all the prints come out much darker than the screen.

So far i must have wasted 20 or so sheets of this premium paper to get 5 good A4 prints :doh: not to mention the amount of ink the printer has drunk doing it :shock: @ £495 per litre for ink it's a little :hissyfit: that I can't get it to do what I want it to do.
Click to expand...


You obviously haven't understood my post. Epson, Ilford, Canon, ect all do there own profiles, but there not custom.

With custom profiles you will be sent 2 test charts to print out and you will then post them back. Then something like the GretagMacbeth colour profiler will be used to make your profiles, and will then be emailed to you. You then install the profiles strait into Photoshop.

Now when you want to print a photo you select the profile in Photoshop to match the paper your printing on. The result will be a perfect or close to perfect match to what you see on screen.

If you want good results you have to work at it, why pay hundreds or thousands of pounds on you camera gear only to have poor results in your printing. My only other surgestion is to use a pro lab.

Hope this makes things a little clearer.
If your going to Focus check out the Fotospeed stand.
 
I understood you m8 :)

I liked the thought of Epson being able to make a printer ICC file which works with their ink and papers and printer.

The way you suggest sounds better though as the "bodging" is done by the profile rather than me trying to correct it :D


I won't be going to Focus though, so i'll check their website a bit later.

Thanks for the input so far :)
 
digitalfailure said:
I understood you m8 :)

I liked the thought of Epson being able to make a printer ICC file which works with their ink and papers and printer.

The way you suggest sounds better though as the "bodging" is done by the profile rather than me trying to correct it :D


I won't be going to Focus though, so i'll check their website a bit later.

Thanks for the input so far :)
Click to expand...


Your welcome, I remember how frustrating it was when I had the same problem, all that ink a paper going to waist. I never would have bothered with custom profiles as most places charge around £50 each.:eek2:

It was only when I went to Focus last year and past the Fotospeed stand, that I noticed they where giving free Custom icc's when you bought there paper. Ok it's a bit of a catch in that you have to by their paper, but there paper is good IMO, so it was a win,win situation for me. :)
 
i'll look at getting the custom icc soted when I come back at the weekend, i had a quick look at the attendee's at FOI and fotospeed don't appear to be on the list.

A quick squirt round the interweb shows £50 is around the average price.
 
digitalfailure said:
i'll look at getting the custom icc soted when I come back at the weekend, i had a quick look at the attendee's at FOI and fotospeed don't appear to be on the list.

A quick squirt round the interweb shows £50 is around the average price.
Click to expand...



Have another look mate, they are on the list for FOI. I've also spoken to Ray last week and he's confirmed that they will be there. As for their web site, they'll be the first to admit it needs updating. Why pay £50 when you can have them for nothing?.

If your really going to look into custom icc's let me know and I'll pm you my phone number if you want it, it's much easier explained over the phone.:thumb:
 
ASH said:
Yes but there not custom profiles.:hissyfit:
Click to expand...
Yes I know, but you have to remember some people don't have funds to go down this route, and buy the cheapest inks and papers they can afford.

Using a basic profile for their paper is better than none, even though their images won't be accurately replicated.

As you've already said above, Fotospeed's webbie is out of date.
I was a bit confused with your comment for free custom profiles, when they state on their website a charge.
This link (Fotospeed Pricelist) will clear that up, they do offer free custom profiles when you buy their paper.

I'm going to give them a try, and will hopefully be singing praises for them in a couple of weeks.
 
Matt said:
Yes I know, but you have to remember some people don't have funds to go down this route, and buy the cheapest inks and papers they can afford.

Using a basic profile for their paper is better than none, even though their images won't be accurately replicated.

As you've already said above, Fotospeed's webbie is out of date.
I was a bit confused with your comment for free custom profiles, when they state on their website a charge.
This link (Fotospeed Pricelist) will clear that up, they do offer free custom profiles when you buy their paper.

I'm going to give them a try, and will hopefully be singing praises for them in a couple of weeks.
Click to expand...

Hi matt, it all a matter of opinion mate. IMO the profiles offered by Epson ect are no better than if you try tweaking things your self, but that's just my opinion.

A word of warning, when I first received my profiles from Fotospeed and installed them into CS, I found that the prints were printing out over saturated by about 20%. Ray from Fotospeed told me he could make adjustments but I told him not to bother as I would just reduce the saturation by 20% in Photoshop before printing.

Now here's the funny thing, now I'm using CS2 and there's no over saturation at all. The prints are now pretty accurate if not bang on. If you want any more info I would be more than willing to talk to you on the phone, just pm me.:thumb:
 
Thinking I might have to give these guys a try, at the moment I'm having the printing too dark issue again. It seems to happen under varying conditions, most notably when I'm printing shots with a lot of blue in them though when I've run the tests. I've also had better results when pronting from he epson print util.

Having said all this though, when I used to print from film at home, I used to do test prints, strips, etc. all saved paper ;)

BOT..... If I'm shooting jpeg then I'm constrained to sRGB but if it's raw, then I always output Adobe.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top